Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
International human rights standards protect the rights of persons to be able to choose what they wish to wear, and in particular to be able to manifest their religious belief. Thus, Human Rights Watch in their report, focusing on the hijab ban for state officials in Germany, said that: “Restrictions should only be implemented where fully justified by the state, and be the least restrictive necessary”.1 Proclamation of wearing the hijab in public institutions as illegal is undermining the autonomy of individuals, their right to choose, their right to privacy and intimacy, and their self-determination. In addition to this, several European countries such as Germany and France directly prevent women wearing hijab to work or attend school in the public state institutions, which further intensified already negative attitude of Western public towards wearing hijab. Most of these things it is possible to see through the analysis of the situation that exists in practice and analysis of several court cases. In France, for years women with Hijab encounter problems, both in education and in ...
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
One of Sultana Yusufali’s strongest arguments in “My body is my own business” is her scrutinization of the exploitation of female sexuality. Initially Yusufali writes about the injudicious individuals that assume she is oppressed by her hijab. Thereafter, she describes them as “brave individuals who have mustered the courage to ask me about the way I dress”. Moreover, Yusufali’s word choice is intriguing as she utilizes the word “brave” when laymen hear this word they habitually associate the aforementioned with heroic, valiant and courageous. Consequently, Yusufali ensues to comprise her opinions on the hijab and how it carries a number of negative connotations in western society. Furthermore, Yusufali proceeds to strike on the importance
The author of this essay thinks it is ridiculous that women cannot wear their hijab in certain places around the world. Many people think the hijab is not necessary. However, it is part of what Muslim women believe. She explains in her essay, "So next time you hear about a hijab ban think about your best pair of jeans or your faded t-shirt with the logo of your favorite band" (Fakhraie 461). A hijab is just like every other piece of clothing that covers up the body. It can be part of their religion, or they can wear a hijab just because they like how it
The article “My Body Is My Own Business” by Naheed Mustafa is about an Islamic women’s principle that putting on her usual headscarf, or Hijab, actually empowers her as a female, contrary to the popular principle that the hijab represents male oppressiveness. She ex...
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
Ever pass by Muslim woman in a hijab at the mall or park and think how oppressive and restraining her culture must be? Maysan Haydar, a New York social worker who practices the Muslim tradition of veiling, believes otherwise. In her article, “Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering,” Haydar highlights on her experiences as a Muslim living in an American culture, where showing more skin is the “norm.” Haydar speaks specifically to a crowd who unconsciously makes assumptions about certain Muslim practices, in hopes of sharing the truth behind them. Haydar suggests that, contrary to popular belief, not all Muslim women cover themselves strictly as an “oppressive” religious practice, but that some women, like herself, find
In Joan Scott’s book The Politics of the Veil she argues that contemporary understandings of Muslims and their place in French society are rooted in a longer history of racism and colonialism that reaches back to the 19th century. The controversies of wearing a veil in France have root causes dating back to French colonial. Scott traces back through time to examine the initial history between these two nations. She addresses the causes through her themes of racism, individualism, secularism and sexuality in which she intertwines to give light on the veil controversies.
The documentary “Young, Muslim, and French” brings attention to the islamophobia that is going on in France. In September 2004, the French government passed a law banning religious paraphernalia in schools, especially targeting head scarfs. The government claims this was a way to “end extremism”. The school system believes that there is no place for religion in school, and around the young in their formative years. The veil is an expression of their devotion to Islam, not a symbol of terrorism. Not wearing it contradicts their religion and even jeopardizes their place in heaven, and puts a great amount of stress on Muslim students. Which results in the French education failing to properly teach and support these students. Muslim students are thrown off the education path and often study to become electricians and other technical careers. Girls are forced to choose between practicing their faith and receiving an education.
Muslims, Sikhs, and many other religious affiliations have often been targeted for hate crimes, racial slurs, and misfortunate events. We are all different in our own ways some are good and some are bad yet one event changes everything for everyone affiliated with the group. The book The Politics of the Veil by Joan Scott a renowned pioneer in gender studies gives a detailed and analytical book of about the French views towards the Muslim females in France during 2004. The author talks about why the French governments official embargo of wearing conspicuous signs is mainly towards the headscarves for Muslim girls under the age of eighteen in public schools. The main themes of book are gender inequality, sexism, and cultural inequality historical schools used in the book are history of below, woman’s history, cultural history, and political history. In this essay, I will talk about why Joan Scotts argument on why the French government’s ban on wearing conspicuous signs was
On October 11, 2006, district Judge Paul Paruk dismissed a lawsuit case between plaintiff, Ginnah Muhammad, and defendant, Enterprise-Rent-A-Car, because of the plaintiff’s refusal to remove her veil in court (Murray,2010). The United States is viewed as a beacon of light for liberal democracies because of the widespread involvement of citizens in government, free elections, and emphasis on human rights. The US Department of State reports, “The protection of fundamental human rights was a foundation stone in the establishment of the U.S. over 200 years ago.” The US still holds the objectives behind its foundation in high regard and has gotten involved in spreading the ideas of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights across the globe. Article 18 in the Declaration of Human Rights and Article One in the United States Constitution issue freedom of religion for all individuals. Judge Paruk’s demand for Muhammad to remove her veil was viewed as a violation of civil rights and infringement of the free exercise clause in Article One by some, but other citizens saw this demand as just and necessary in order to uphold the Sixth Amendment which calls for fair trials (Paruk and Walid, 2006). The government’s main aim is to uphold constitutional rights, and there is debate about which rights hold precedent and are most valuable (Murray, 2010).
There are many different views towards Muslim choice of clothing especially wearing the veil. “I wear it believing it is necessary, but someone else can be wearing it believing that she is doing something extra” said Hamna Ahmed. One of the many reasons a Muslim can be wearing the veil are their own personal decisions too. Hamna has been wearing it for seven years now, despite her mother and three of her four sisters staying uncovered. Socially this causes an issue with the meaning of the veil and conflict with other groups. With many different consumptions of religion, what it means, what is considered to be practicing and what is not can lead to negative misunderstandings. Ultimately the decisions are up to the individuals although; there is likely to be misinterpretation between the meaningfulness of religion to family and society. On an even bigger scale of things this could also impact society and it...
Hijab is a choice that some women or girls make for their own security, for more privacy, or because it makes them feel comfortable and confident about themselves. It should be a choice though, and as it is not proven to us that it is obligatory, countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan should remove their laws that insist every girl puts the veil on. Freedom of choice should be given in these countries. It is not required in Islam so it shouldn’t be forced on anyone anywhere. In addition to this, Islam’s beauty is it’s freedom, the choice it provides you with, let it not be ruined.
“Women’s rights in Islam” is great controversial topic going on nowadays. The world is colored with different cultures and religions. Most people come up with different thoughts for other religion’s people by just having one look on them. Veil is obsession for some people, whereas, being bald is freedom in some people’s point of view. There are lots of misconceptions about women’s rights in Islam among non muslims. If women are covering their body or if they like to stay at home, people think that they don’t have any freedom in this religion and women are obsessed. But this is not reality. A person cannot point out anything wrong and blame other’s religion just because of his own confusion. He needs to study thoroughly and then come up with opposing viewpoints. Therefore, the misconception about women’s rights in Islam should be removed because women have equal rights, veil is for their protection, and they have freedom of speech and expression.
Davis, Derek H. “Reacting to France’s Ban: headscarves and other Religious Attire in American Public Schools.” Journal of Church and State. Spring 2004. EBSCO. Online. Feb 28 2010.
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.